Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether an undertaking recorded in interlocutory proceedings before the High Court (para 21.2) precluded admission of the Corporate Debtor into CIRP under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 by showing the debt had not crystallized.
Analysis: The undertaking arose from interlocutory proceedings in a commercial suit and was confined to interim relief; such interlocutory findings do not attain finality for purposes of independent statutory proceedings. The appeal does not dispute that the Corporate Debtor admitted liability in its own communications; acknowledgement of liability operates as an admission of debt and negates the need for further independent determination for initiation under Section 7. The undertaking recorded in the miscellaneous appeal cannot be read expansively to prevent the Financial Creditor from pursuing Section 7 proceedings where an admitted debt exists.
Conclusion: The undertaking recorded in the interlocutory proceedings does not prevent crystallization or establishment of debt for the purposes of initiating proceedings under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016; the appeal is dismissed and the initiation of CIRP stands valid (decision against the appellant).